Sunday, October 24, 2004

Two Parties

There is a misconception that people are basically good. Raise kids and you'll know better. The little darlings find ways on their own to test the limits. In all reality, all people tend toward evil. Social strictures keep us from acting on them. When the social strictures are relaxed or we are able to interact anonymously with others, our inherent evil can be seen. Drive on any interstate and you'll see that predators abound. Just get in front of someone who wants to go 20 MPH over the speed limit and you'll likely see a real jerk. Let someone going 5 MPH slower than you want to go and you'll see what kind of jerk you can be. Another example is the internet. See how offensive people can get. They'll call you names they normally wouldn't if they met you face-to-face. Their true nature comes out.

There is truth to the axiom that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Look at the evidence:

In single party (read: socialist) countries, the government becomes controlling and intrusive. As a result, the quality of life becomes poor for the population in general. Paranoia grips the party and people are controlled by lies, closed borders and government terror. Examples are Nazi Germany, the old Soviet Union, China (until recently), Cuba, and most Muslim law countries.

In countries where several small parties vie for control, there tends to be cycles of coups. With too many parties, no one candidate can have very many popular votes. Frustration causes frequent political upheavals. The government consequently never accomplishes much and the perpetual quasi-anarchy stifles economic growth. Therefore, much of the population lives in dire poverty. Examples include several countries in South America and Africa.

In countries where a very few parties have any significant power, a candidate of one party can still hold enough popular votes to maintain viability. For example, President Clinton never won a popular vote, but he had enough for the rest of the voters to put up with him while he was in.

Here's my point:
There is a level of technology that's available for production whether or not it's marketable. We know that "Big Brother" has the potential to listen in on our telephone calls, read our e-mail, listen in on us in our homes "see" us inside and out from outer space. The known technology is there. What we don't know is the level of secret technology our federal intelligence and investigative services currently employ. This is the stuff that makes a lot of people paranoid. However, look at the 9/11 discussions and the failing of our government to piece it together. They're no big privacy threat...yet.

As long as Democrats and Republicans are battling for the predominant ideology, we should be okay. When one succeeds in effectively ousting the other, we'll be doomed to the fate of the one-party states. I'm a conservative Republican, but I recognize that true conservatism would be lost in the Republican party if there were no party to challenge it. This is the key principle to remember.

What I fear today is not the Democratic party. There are some fine Democrats out there. I don't agree with them ideologically, but they are honorable people. (Likewise, there are some Republicans I wouldn't trust for anything.) But the greatest fear is the subversive liberal ideology that crosses borders and would seek to sell us out to the global community, i.e. the UN. This is the same ideology that has subverted the Democratic party. If it succeeds in subordinating our government to the UN, we would effectively have a one-party world order. We would cease to be the world stabalizing force and "Big Brother" would turn out to be international.